alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.01

                  CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER &
                            CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Michael Pacult, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
White Oak Financial Services, Inc. as general partner of Providence Select
Fund, L.P., certify that (i) the Form 10Q- for the period ended September 30,
2007 of Providence Select Fund, L.P. fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the
information contained in the Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of Providence Select Fund, L.P.


PROVIDENCE SELECT FUND, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
By:	White Oak Financial Services, Inc., General Partner



By: /s/ Michael Pacult
Michael Pacult
Chief Executive Officer &
Chief Financial Officer

Date:	November 19, 2007


<page>
Fact Sheet: USCIS Revises Form for Naturalization Candidates Seeking

Medical Disability Exceptions

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) released today a revised Form N-648, Medical Certification for Disability Exceptions, for individuals with disabilities who are seeking exceptions from the English and civics requirements for naturalization.

USCIS will shortly be hosting public information sessions on the revised form for medical professionals and other stakeholders.

Background

The law requires naturalization applicants to demonstrate proficiency of U.S. civics and the English language. Individuals with certain

disabilities or impairments may request exceptions from either or both of these statutory requirements. Form N-648 was revised

following extensive dialogue among USCIS subject-matter experts, customers, medical professionals, community-based organizations

and legal practitioners.

Form Revisions

The form revisions are intended to clarify the requirements and instructions and to standardize the process for applicants, medical

professionals and USCIS officers. The revised form enables medical professionals to provide information that is necessary for USCIS

to understand the medical professional’s diagnosis and its relationship to the naturalization requirements. The Form N-648 and the

accompanying guidance will assist USCIS adjudicators as they review each form.

As a result of the revisions:

Applicants and medical professionals can more clearly understand the requirements for submitting Form N-648. USCIS also revised the instructions to clarify how to complete the form.

Medical professionals can focus their evaluation on a medical diagnosis and need not evaluate the applicant’s daily activities, which may not be relevant.

Medical professionals can complete the form electronically or on paper.

Applicants are no longer required to report if another government agency has made a disability determination for them.

Interpreters for applicants or medical professionals will complete a new certification section of the form.

Public Information Sessions

In January, USCIS will begin hosting public information sessions to help medical professionals and other stakeholders understand the

changes to Form N-648. Online videos will be available to explain how best to use the form. 

Additional Information

USCIS will accept the previous version of the Form N-648 for 90 days, from Dec. 22, 2010 until March 21, 2011. Beginning March 22, 2011, USCIS will only accept the current version of Form N-648, dated 9/24/2010.

The interim guidance instructing USCIS personnel how to review the revised Form N-648 is available for public review and comment

at www.uscis.gov/outreach.

For more information on USCIS and its programs, please visit www.uscis.gov.

Last Reviewed/Updated: 12/22/2010

Fact Sheet: USCIS Revises Form for Naturalization Candidates ... http://www.uscis.gov/news/fact-sheets/fact-sheet-uscis-revises-fo...

1 of 1 03/12/15 8:27 AM
APPENDIX E7

DE MINIMIS CONCURRENCE LETTERS
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                                       5
<MULTIPLIER>                                            1,000,000

<S>                                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                               6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                     DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                          JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                                         73
<SECURITIES>                                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                   0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                    0
<INVENTORY>                                                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                0
<PP&E>                                                      3,100
<DEPRECIATION>                                              1,402
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             11,121
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                           0
<BONDS>                                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                           0
<PREFERRED>                                                     0
<COMMON>                                                       15
<OTHER-SE>                                                  1,583
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                               11,121
<SALES>                                                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                              849
<CGS>                                                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                 144
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                               40
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                            219
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                               114
<INCOME-TAX>                                                   45
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                            69
<DISCONTINUED>                                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                 0
<CHANGES>                                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                                   69
<EPS-BASIC>                                                   0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                   0




</TABLE>
----

|   | Exhibit 15.1 |
|--------|--------------|

|   | Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton |
|--------|-------------------------------|

|   | Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton |
|--------|-------------------------------|

|   | S.E.N.C.R.L. |
|--------|--------------|

|   | Bureau 2000 |
|--------|-------------|

|   | Tour de la Banque Nationale |
|--------|-----------------------------|

|   | 600, rue De La Gauchetière Ouest |
|--------|---------------------------------------|

|   | Montréal (Québec) H3B 4L8 |
|--------|-------------------------------------|

|   | Téléphone / Telephone : (514) 878-2691 |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------|

|   | Télécopieur / Facsimile : (514) 878-2127 |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------|

|   | www.rcgt.com |
|--------|--------------|

|   | CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------|

|   | To the Board of Directors of Comamtech Inc. |
|--------|---------------------------------------------|

|   | s/s Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton |
|--------|-----------------------------------|

|   | Chartered Accountants |
|--------|-----------------------|

|   | Montreal, Canada |
|--------|------------------|

|   | March 31, 2011 |
|--------|----------------|
.*AO 450 (Rev. 5/85) Judgment in a Civil Case

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Sean William Beck JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

vs. Case No. 2:11CV155

 Magistrate Judge King

Muskingum County , Ohio, et al 

 

[] Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have been tried

and the jury has rendered its verdict.

[] Decision by Court. This action came to trial or hearing before the Court. The issues have been tried

or heard and a decision has been rendered.

[X] Decision by Court. This action was decided by the Court without a trial or hearing.

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that pursuant to the Opinion and Order filed on

October 10, 2012 , Defendant’s motion for Summary Judgment is granted on all of the

Plaintiff claims.

Date: October 10, 2012 John P. Hehman, Clerk

By: _s/Rashan Spraggins__________

 Rashan Spraggins , Deputy Clerk

Case: 2:11-cv-00155-NMK Doc #: 36 Filed: 10/10/12 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: <pageID>
# C_2007269EN.01004801.xml

| 10.11.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 269/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/48

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 5 September 2007 — Document Security Systems v ECB

(Case T-295/05) (1)

1

(Monetary Union - Issue of euro banknotes - Alleged use of a patented invention designed to prevent counterfeiting - Action for infringement of a European patent - Lack of jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance - Inadmissibility - Action for damages)

(2007/C 269/85)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Document Security Systems, Inc. (Rochester, New York, United States) (represented by: L. Cohen, H. Sheraton, B. Uphoff, solicitors, and C. Stanbrook, QC)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: C. Zilioli and P. Machado, agents, assisted by E. Garayar Gutiérrez and G. de Ulloa y Suelves, lawyers)

Defendant:

Re:

Action for a declaration that the ECB infringed the applicant's rights conferred by a European patent and for compensation for the resulting loss and damage that the applicant claims to have suffered.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action for patent infringement is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action for patent infringement is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | The action for damages is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The action for damages is dismissed.

| 3. | Document Security Systems, Inc. is ordered to pay its own costs and to pay those of the European Central Bank. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Document Security Systems, Inc. is ordered to pay its own costs and to pay those of the European Central Bank.

---

(1)  OJ C 229, 17.9.2005.

1

---
InThe Matter Of: 

## SERVED: April 13, 2016
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS WASHINGTON, DC

' ....**~** L,_.**~** .:...**~** ...... ;____ -!:\ ) ) ) ) ) ) DocketNo. FAA-2014-0867 BIRMINGHAM FLIGHT CENTER, INC. Respondent Case No. 2012S0090053

ORDER SETTING DEADLINE FORRESPONDENT TO FILE SUPPLEMENT AL MATERIAL AND CONTINUING THE MOTION CONFERENCE OnMarch 30, 2016, an Order Setting Motion Conference was filed. This Order set for April 13, 2016, a Motion Conference on the Respondent's Motion for Alternate Sanctions.

·OnApril 16, 20l(), the parties convened by telephone for the Motion Conference. During the Motion Conference, the Court set a filing deadline and a date and time for a Continued

. Motion Conference. This Order codifiesthose dates. Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 13.205(a)(l) and (6), and after reviewing all relevant caselaw, regulation, statutory authority, and being fully advised; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The deadline for the Respondent to file its Supplemental Material shall be May 2, 2016. 2. The parties shall reconvene for a Continued Motion Conference onMay 5, 2016, at 10:30 a.m. Eastern time. · 3. The Office ofHearings shall provide the parties with the conference call number, no later than May 2, 2016.

Attachment: Service ListDocketNo. FAA-2014-0867 (Civil Penalty Action)


### SERVICE LIST - BY U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000 1 ONE COPY Mr. Christopher R. Stevenson Complainant's Counsel Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe Regional Counsel, ASO-7 Southern Region · 1701 Columbia Avenue College Park, GA 30337 TEL:**404-305~5200** FAX: 404-305-5223 Mr. Paul R. Borth Respondent's Counsel Barnett & Borth, LLC 800 Waukegan Road, Suite 200 Glenview, IL 60025-4387 TEL: 847-724-5520 FAX:: 815-356-7042 Judge J.E. Sullivan ' US. Administrative LawJudge

Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FAX:: 202-366-7536 Birmingham Flight Center, Inc. Respondent 4243 East Lake Blvd. Birmingham, AL 35217

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2WIOOO, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.
Exhibit 10(c)


                                 AMENDMENT NO. 1
                                     TO THE
                   MET-PRO CORPORATION 1992 STOCK OPTION PLAN

This amendment to the Met-Pro Corporation 1992 Stock Option Plan (the "Plan") is
made and approved this 4th day of April, 2001.

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has adopted the Plan, and the Plan was
thereafter approved by the stockholders.

WHEREAS, Section 15 of the Plan authorizes the Board of Directors to amend the
Plan.

WHEREAS, the Board desires to amend the Plan to permit the Board to determine
the manner in which payment of the exercise price of options granted under the
Plan shall be made.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended in the following manner:

     1.   The second sentence of Section 11 (b) of the Plan is hereby deleted.

     2.   A new second sentence of Section 11 (b) of the Plan is hereby added to
          the Plan as follows:

          "Such notice shall be accompanied by payment of the full option price
          of such shares in the form of a check payable to the order of the
          Company, or by payment of the full option price of such shares in such
          other form as the Board may from time to time determine."

     Except as expressly provided for herein, the Plan as amended remains in
     force and effect, unamended and unmodified.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused its authorized officer to
execute this Amendment on behalf of the Company.

     WITNESS                                MET-PRO CORPORATION


                                            By: /s/ William L. Kacin
--------------------------------               ---------------------------------
                                                William L. Kacin
                                                Chief  Executive Officer

<PAGE>
No. 46285.

#### Protests 978855-G, etc., of Bloomingdale Bros., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of fluorspar articles similar to those the subject of *Cathay Crafts Corp.*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 87, C. D. 434). It was therefore held dutiable at 40 percent under paragraph 214 as claimed. .
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 99-2885

___________ In re: Case Corporation, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern Petitioner. * District of Arkansas.

* * [UNPUBLISHED]

___________ Submitted: November 18, 1999 Filed: December 7, 1999

___________ Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Case Corporation, a cotton picker manufacturer, was sued by farmers whose Case pickers were damaged by fire. Between May 1995 and March 1996, certain Case employees designated as the "Cotton Picker Improvement Team" (CPIT) met to conduct "an impartial review of cotton picker losses, including fires, to determine and implement appropriate corrective and preventative measures." The CPIT meetings were also attended by Case's outside counsel, who wrote a series of letters to Case's corporate counsel detailing the information discussed at the meetings. When opposing counsel requested that Case produce these letters, Case objected, claiming the letters were protected from discovery by the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. After examining the letters in camera, the district court concluded the letters were discoverable because the meetings were not held in anticipation of or in-2-

preparation for litigation, the purpose of the meetings was not to obtain legal advice from Case's outside counsel, and the letters reported unprivileged "factual matters and observations and opinions of [Case's] employees." In ordering production of the letters, the district court found "most telling" a passage in one of the letters in which Case's outside counsel stated: During the course of this meeting, as has occurred in the past, the participants in this committee startedto discuss how to defend lawsuits, and must be re-directed back to the primary purpose of the committee. This committee was formed to determine whether there is any consistency to cotton picker fires such that there can be any changes to the cotton picker either by way of engineering or warnings to reduce frequency of cotton picker fires. Since most of the participants in these meetings believe that the primary cause of cotton picker fires is inadequate maintenance and inadequate training of operators, they start with the idea of trying to prove that it is not a design or a warning problem. [One of Case's corporate attorneys] and I have previously discussed the approach and agreed that this group is to be involved in engineering questions rather than legal questions. Case now petitions this court for a writ of mandamus, seeking to prevent production of the letters. Having carefully reviewed the documents in question, the parties' arguments, and the district court's thorough order, we conclude the district court didnot abuse its discretion in ordering production of the letters, see In re Bieter Co. , 16 F.3d 929, 932-33 (8th Cir. 1994), and deny Case's petition for writ of mandamus, see 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Jump to navigation

            - About
            - Browse Collections
            - Advanced Search
            - Contact

## You are here

- Home  › 
- Browse Collections  › 
- U.S. Government Posters

# West Point Dam

                - U.S. Government Posters

## Description

                    -           Title        
                    -  West Point Dam 
                    -           Creator        
                    -  United States. Army. Corps of EngineersBlomquist, Bill 
                    -           Description        
                    -  West Point Dam by Bill Blomquist 
                    -           Subject: Time        
                    -  1980-1990 
                    -           Country        
                    -  United States 
                    -           State        
                    -  Georgia 
                    -           Physical Description        
                    -  141 × 51 cm 
                    -           Number of Pages        
                    -  1 
                    -           Host institution        
                    -  University of Iowa. Libraries. Government Publications 
                    -           Digitization Specifications        
                    -  Scanned with Zeutschel OS 12000 Scanner at 300 ppi, 24-bit color. Archival tiff image available. 
                    -           Rights Management        
                    -  This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. 
                    -           Contact Information        
                    -  Please contact the Government Publications Department at the University of Iowa Libraries: lib-govpub@uiowa.edu 
                    -           Item Type (AAT)        
                    -  Posters 
                    -           Item Type (IMT)        
                    -  jpeg 
                    -           Identifier        
                    -  D103.49-3.R52-11.jpg 

                - Contact the Libraries
                - Library locations & hours
                - News & Events
                - Help using the Libraries
                - Assistance for people with disabilities
                - Our diversity statement
                - Thank a Librarian
                - Web site/page feedback  OR  general suggestions
                -  

                -  
                - 100 Main Library (LIB)
                - 125 West Washington St.
                - Iowa City, IA 52242-1420
                - 319-335-5299 (Service Desk)
                - ©2020  The University of Iowa
                -
No. 49305.

#### Protests 840335-G, etc., of American Decorative Flower Co. et al. (Baltimore, etc.).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
Case: 2:12-cv-00498-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 85 Filed: 02/24/16 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
Case: 2:12-cv-00498-EAS-KAJ Doc #: 85 Filed: 02/24/16 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
# C_2007269EN.01006903.xml

| 10.11.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 269/69 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/69

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 11 September 2007 — O'Connor v Commission

(Case F-12/07 AJ)

(Legal aid)

(2007/C 269/126)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Elizabeth O'Connor (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: J. -N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: D. Martin and M. Velardo, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Application for legal aid.

Operative part of the order

The application for legal aid in Case F-12/07 AJ O'Connor v Commission is dismissed.

The application for legal aid in Case F-12/07 AJ

v

is dismissed.

---